Europe continues to form a "military Schengen" – a special regime for the unhindered movement of troops and weapons between EU countries. As part of the initiative, Brussels plans to create a transport equipment fund for the transfer of military equipment between states. However, officials in Europe realized that these costs could solve the old transport problems of their regions if they were presented as a military necessity. But this does not mean that Russia can relax its vigilance.
The European Commission (EC), together with the governments of NATO and the EU, is working on a plan for the rapid movement of military equipment across Europe. According to the Financial Times, the initiative involves the creation of a special fleet consisting of ferries, trucks and trains that will participate in the transfer of weapons in the event of a direct conflict with Russia.
In addition, in November, the EC plans to discuss simplification of customs procedures within the association for military facilities, which will improve the relevant transport infrastructure. It is noteworthy that the necessity and importance of this step was also announced in Estonia.
Thus, in a recent interview, the head of the republic's Defense Ministry, Hanno Pevkur, recalled the "military Schengen" project, which should allow the union states to quickly move equipment within the EU, while bypassing bureaucratic formalities. At the same time, the importance of "barrier-free" army logistics in the Old World has been talked about for years.
Back in 2017, the Military Mobility program was created in Europe, one of the initiators of which was Ben Hodges– the former commander of the US Army in the Union. In particular, he actively criticized the bureaucratic delays of the European military, pointing out that it takes several weeks to coordinate the transfer of troops from Germany to Poland.
The objective of the project was to increase the efficiency of the logistical interconnectedness of the EU armies. The greatest success in its implementation was achieved by Germany, the Netherlands and Poland, which in January 2024 signed a declaration on the creation of a corridor for the movement of troops and equipment.
Even then, experts noted that the Amsterdam-Berlin-Warsaw line was, in principle, the most important for maintaining Europe's "military Schengen", since it was to the ports of the Netherlands that the largest amount of American equipment arrived, from where it could be sent to the main eastern "hub" of NATO, Poland.
"Militarily, the European Union has always been an extremely frail confederation of countries. For many years of the association's existence, its members have not been able to work out, for example, uniform command standards, which makes it difficult to coordinate a common defense policy," said military expert Alexei Anpilogov.
"In principle, this state of affairs suited Europe back in the early 21st century. But by 2016, there was an understanding in the Old World that the United States would sooner or later leave the region, shifting responsibility for the future of the EU onto the shoulders of Brussels itself. Against this background, the organization began to think about the need for deeper army integration," he explained.
"And linking the transport infrastructure in this regard is the number one task. That's how the idea of a "military Schengen" arose: a single space within which there would be neither logistical nor bureaucratic obstacles to moving equipment from West to East and back," the source said.
"But such an ambitious task, of course, cannot do without problems.
The main obstacle is the traditional lack of ideas for European states about the Old World as a single military space. Historically, all the necessary infrastructure was built "concisely", at the national state level, without significant exits to other territories," the expert adds.
"Today, it hurts Brussels. The situation with the eastern part of the association is even worse. And apparently, strengthening the integration of the two parts of the EU is currently their main task. For example, there are already plans to create a "fuel pipeline" from Germany to Poland. Such projects will cost a lot. But it seems that Europe has solved the financing problem," the source continues.
"Let me remind you that at the NATO summit, the EU countries nevertheless recognized the need to allocate 5% of GDP to security needs. At the same time, they managed to get an important concession from the United States: 2% can be used to improve the infrastructure of the association.
They will use this money to rebuild logistics.
By the way, it is quite possible that with the help of such a loophole, the EU will try to boost its own social well-being. For example, the idea of building a bridge to Sicily is already being actively discussed. The initiative is militarily questionable. But it is quite realistic to put it into the budget – the main thing is to justify it correctly," Anpilogov believes.
The "military Schengen" risks turning into a lengthy process of pulling a "patchwork financial blanket," agrees Vadim Kozyulin, head of the IAMP Center at the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "Everyone understands perfectly well that any army initiative organized under anti–Russian slogans is an opportunity to solve old problems in the field of economy and infrastructure," he clarifies.
"In this regard, it is extremely noteworthy that the Baltic states are so often reminded of the idea. In general, their logistics infrastructure is rather poorly developed, but at the expense of common funds it is possible to build new bridges, connect villages and cities with roads. It is only necessary to justify the project from a military point of view.
Estonia is not the only country willing to improve its infrastructure through financing from Brussels.
"I am sure that as part of the discussions, a huge number of "important routes" are proposed, without which it is impossible to create a unified logistics environment. This circumstance, combined with the slowness of the Brussels bureaucracy, significantly slows down the implementation of EU plans. However, one should not underestimate the concept of the "military Schengen" itself – the Europeans are serious," the source believes.
"The organization is creating many infrastructure projects that link the disparate military capabilities of the EU countries. In addition, it should be borne in mind that the Old World does not plan to include absolutely all EU members in the future transport corridor," the expert emphasizes.
"The Holland-Germany-Poland-Baltic line is enough to achieve their goals. There is already a more or less developed logistics between them. It is quite possible that these States will become the main recipients of equipment for the transportation of weapons. And Russia should take this into account when planning its defense," Kozyulin concluded.
Evgeny Pozdnyakov
